Collaborative Design Group chosen as primary designer for DNR nursery; Alliance named alternate

The State Designer Selection Board on March 18 selected Collaborative Design Group as the primary design firm for a Department of Natural Resources nursery project and named Alliance as the alternate after a roll-call vote.

Heather (staff member) announced the result of the first vote: “By this vote, Collaborative Design Group was selected as the primary firm.” Heather later announced the alternate selection: “By this vote, Alliance was selected as the alternate firm.” The primary vote tally was Collaborative Design Group 4, Alliance 2 and Architecture Advantage 1. In the follow-up vote to name an alternate firm, Alliance received seven votes and Architecture Advantage received none.

Board members said the three finalist teams — Collaborative Design Group, Alliance (sometimes referenced as Alliance Architecture in remarks) and Architecture Advantage — each presented capable proposals, but differed in emphasis. Panelists praised Alliance for prior related work and for explicitly addressing a goal discussed in interviews of achieving large energy reductions, including a cited 90% target. Board members also noted Alliance was the only team to discuss the project budget in concrete terms and to separate “soft costs and hard costs” in a way a layperson could understand.

Several board members said Collaborative Design Group emphasized mechanical and industrial processes and circulation — the movement and handling of equipment and materials on site — and presented multiple conceptual disposition options during interviews. One board member said that approach demonstrated “how people think” during predesign and showed useful early thinking about adjacencies and circulation.

Architecture Advantage received one vote in the primary selection. Board members observed that Architecture Advantage’s presentation was strong overall but that its submission included fewer specific examples tied to the B3 sustainability framework and to mechanical systems than the other teams.

Throughout deliberations, members flagged predesign as an unusually important phase for this project. One panelist said Alliance proposed about five and a half months of predesign work, and several members said they wanted the predesign phase to both document a preferred option and meaningfully test alternatives. Board members also discussed the project budget figure of $10,000,000 cited during the interviews; several called the origin of that number “a mystery” at this stage, noting that legislative allocations or high-level estimates can come before predesign clarifies scope.

Members raised additional technical issues that factored into their evaluations: stormwater, grading and paving were picked up by multiple firms in their interviews; Alliance was noted as the only team to explicitly mention septic considerations. Panelists discussed whether the project is primarily an industrial/process-oriented facility (emphasizing equipment and material flows) or a primarily architectural/site-layout challenge; several said both aspects matter but that site layout and building orientation are central decisions.

One board member also discussed the “fairness factor” referenced in statute, describing it as a consideration when comparing firms that have previously received many state projects. The member said that while fairness is a factor, the statute does not define how to weigh it and that each voting member must balance that concern with professional judgment.

Heather conducted roll calls for both votes. By roll call in the primary selection, Susan voted for Architecture Advantage; Sarah voted for Collaborative Design Group; Steve, Scott and Bill voted for Collaborative Design Group; and Brian (agency representative) and Ted voted for Alliance. In the alternate vote, the board named Alliance as the backup firm by a 7–0 count.

The board did not formalize a written motion in the record beyond the roll-call selection; members said the selected firm and the alternate will proceed to contract negotiation with DNR.